Talk:Mounties/@comment-36.231.36.4-20130629080310/@comment-75.37.2.123-20130703051709
The aforementioned top commenter is- to put it politely- full of it. Relations with the Crown were really, really, *really* important in Canadian politics, and led to a heckuva lot of scandals. Not the least of which when the Governor-General refused the Prime Minister's request. Actual talks about forming a republic (or rather, a republic without tied to the British Crown) have ALWAYS been shot down, and shot down overwhelmingly so in favor of continued status in it. Of course, relations with the US have been at least as important, and the issue of influence has popped up a number of itmes. No, the problem I have with this is that it reads like "How can we make this GrimDerp?" Not only Grimdark, but for apparently no reason. And as an article, it fails. And I say this as someone who has THE highest respect for the accomplishments of the Canadians. Let's start with the essentials, shall we? This is a unit card. But *what* faction is that Unit Card for? It says that the Mounties were heavily Royalist. Okaaay. That would indicate European Alliance. But it's in Canada, and the article mentions after things died down and the UR was formed. So UR? The article doesn't give any indication, or logical reason why these guys exist in the game at present, for who, or why they'd be called up in their fruity red uniforms to fight a serious war for...whatever side they are for. Especially since we're left with the statement that the Royalists were apparently crushed by the Republicans, which prevents them from being stay behinds or what have you. So what are they? Mooks for the tutorial fight? Reconstituted UR troops? Exiled troops? Other? That's just the functional issues. Now it gets even worse when we look at lore. At the worst issues between the three since the last serious border issues died down, things have just about always remained diplomatic or political, not violent. The reasons why things would suddenly go to pot would need a *LOT* of explanation, and we're not given them besides having it as 'Herp the EA and UR/Republicans and Royalists are killing each other in spite of being formerly close for.... REASONS!" Without explaining why Canada would opt to join the US, or at least why the Prime Minister and substantial amounts of his backers would. Secondly, it goes without explaining why this degenerated into widespread bloodshed. ow, there *are* reasons why, but they'd have to be pretty damn good ones. Especially since Canada has weathered immensely constroversial things like conscription without reaching anything like this, so that puts strong doubt on the obvious "Canada is troubled at being bled dry for the EA" explanation. And finally, it just seems needlessly and somewhat irrationally dark. Even if we agree that the two sides would come to violent blows, why would we see things degenerate into no-holds-barred savagry? Both sides are *very* similar ideologically, ethically, and in terms of background, and even during the actual American-Anglo-Canadian clustereffs something like this bomb was not really even considered. And on top of that, if the Royalists are heavily Mounties- IE: The Police- why would they be resorting to things like *terrorism*, given how they're explicitly instructed about things like valuing innocent lives? I can only imagine how bad this would look to EA fans/supporters, or Canadians. Even if the two sides did go to war, I'd expect a fairly "clean" conflict, as far as guerilla war can go. And without a reason to believe otherwise being established in the story, that's what we'd probably stick to. So really, questionable story, mysterious unit, and generally a big question mark all around.